According to the Los Angeles Times, Roman Catholic Archbishop José H. Gomez is worried about money. Says the paper, “The archdiocese has hired a New York company, Guidance In Giving Inc., to study the feasibility of a large-scale fundraiser that would shore up a bottom line hit hard by costly abuse litigation.” How large is large-scale? The Times puts the size of the proposed campaign at $200 million.

A couple of thoughts: First, if you pay a consultant to help you decide whether you should engage in a bigger project that would bring the consultant even more money . . . well, the words “conflict of interest” come to mind. But that’s a minor point. They know they need to raise the money, so the question they really are asking is how.

Which brings me to the second point: In my experience, there are two — and only two — times when a church organization undertakes a capital campaign like this.

One is when there is such excitement and energy that the time is right to take a bold step forward around a particular well-agreed-upon program. “We’re bursting at the seams, and we need to build a new building,” a parish might say, or “many of our parishes are growing dramatically, and we have to divide them, build new sanctuaries, and bring in new clergy to minister to them” says a bishop.

The other is when there is such a dire crisis that the energy of the community needs to be harnessed to address the crisis. “The creek behind the church overflowed its banks, flooded the basement, and caused a fire — and because it was all traced back to a flood, it is not covered by insurance because we don’t have flood insurance.”

Sadly, Archbishop Gomez and his archdiocese are not looking at the first set of circumstances here. Even more sadly, they are simultaneously trying not to admit it is a terrible crisis. According to NBC News, the archdiocese “is exploring a campaign to raise $200 million for the diocese to meet ‘a variety of needs,’ including ‘priests’ retirement, seminarian education, Catholic schools, Catholic Charities and parish needs.’”

Sorry, but exploring a capital campaign with such a diffuse set of goals and needs is an exercise of dubious worth. It makes it look like the archdiocese is still trying to downplay the horrendous abuse scandal that has unfolded in their midst. Potential donors will see this, shake their heads, and ask “why should be trust what you are saying about why you are asking for money, when you try so hard not to say what is driving all this?” Only if the campaign is honestly and clearly focused does it have a hope of success.

So let me offer a little advice to Archbishop Gomez. It’s free, from one pastor to another, and maybe it will help.

The campaign starts with a simple letter that goes something like this:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

We, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, have been found liable for massive financial compensation because of hundreds of cases of abuse done by priests of this church and because of the failures of church leaders to appropriately deal with these abusive priests by turning over what we knew of these crimes to the criminal justice system. Compensation is due to the victims of this abuse, not simply because of a verdict in a courtroom, but as a matter of moral justice. It is, in a very real sense, a very public act of corporate contrition.

To be able to pay this restitution, including legal fees and the cost of counseling for these victims, we are initiating a financial appeal that we are calling “The Archdiocesan Penitential Fund.” All contributions to this fund will be used to pay first all the obligations to the victims of priest abuse, and only then will we turn to the costs we incurred in dealing with these legal cases. Not one penny will be diverted to “administrative costs” or any other archdiocesan expenses, and any surplus funds will be given to an appropriate outside charity involved in helping the survivors of abuse.

Until such time as this fund is filled, Cardinal Mahony will confine himself in prayer and contemplation in a monastic cell, leaving it only for meals taken in silence, for a one hour exercise period each day, and to use the bathroom. He will not have general access to the internet or email, but may watch a limited amount of television, and may have whatever books brought to his cell that can be borrowed from the library. The only exceptions to this are travel that he is obligated to do by virtue of his status as a bishop and cardinal of the church — attendance at meetings of the USCCB and various Vatican commissions where he has responsibility. When traveling for these purposes, he will travel in the most ordinary manner, stay in the most austere accommodations, and avoid any kind of luxury. To the extent that these obligations require access to a computer with internet access, he shall have such access.

Until such time as this fund is filled, I will give up my residence, and rotate my accommodations on a weekly basis from parish to parish, staying with the local priest in a guest bedroom if available, or on a cot if the rectory has no guest bedroom. I will do no entertaining at the archbishop’s residence, and will accept no invitations to anything but the most ordinary of meals. Like Cardinal Mahony, I also have obligations beyond Los Angeles, and will travel in a similiarly humble and austere manner.

Both Cardinal Mahony and I will also be looking at our personal finances, and pledge to make a substantial contribution toward this fund, to get the appeal off the ground. Insofar as I can, I will make repeated gifts, until such time as the fund is full.

But I also must ask for your help. This fund will not be filled without your generous support, and yet you are not the ones responsible for either the abuse done by priests nor the reprehensible actions to cover up this abuse and prevent the abusers from being held accountable. The failures are not yours in the pews, but ours in the archdiocesan office. Even so, the archdiocesan office is nothing without the thousands upon thousands of the faithful who support our work. You have financially supported us in good times, and now we must ask for your financial support in a time of great pain.

Beyond that, however, we need you to help hold us accountable for our failures.

Until such time as this fund if filled, the altars of every parish in the Archdiocese will have a six inch band of black cloth laid across them, hanging down in front of the altar as a visible reminder of the sorrow we have brought upon ourselves by our handling of these crimes. In the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, a second matching band of cloth will also be draped across the arms of the archbishop’s chair. When I approach the chair to take my seat, I will remove the cloth and place it in my lap, and when I stand up, I will drape it once more across the chair.

Until such time as this fund is filled, no flowers shall be used to adorn any sanctuary. This includes not only flowers at regular Sunday mass, but also Easter lilies and flowers at funerals. Let the space be bare, as another reminder of our brokenness.

Some may find these changes to be onerous and misplaced. I can easily hear good and faithful people ask “Do what you want with the cathedral, but why should our altar and our worship be changed? It is the abusive priests who carried out the abuse. It is the leaders of the archdiocese who compounded the abuse by hiding it from the authorities.” The changes I have laid out for ordinary parish life are precisely because both of those statements of responsibility are absolutely true.

We — Cardinal Mahony, myself, and the various others who have worked with us as we have led this archdiocese — have failed you, and we want you to remember that. We want you to remind us of that. We want you to demand that we do better. As I visit in parishes of the archdiocese, seeing that black band of cloth will remind me of the pain that the leaders of this church have caused every Roman Catholic of every parish in our archdiocese. It is not you who have failed, but I and the others who serve to oversee the work of the archdiocese, and we need you to hold us accountable.

I pray for the day that we will have raised the money that we owe to those who were the victims of the abusive priests, for it will mean that we have done what has been commanded of us, and paid what we owe to those who have suffered at the hands of the church. I pray for the day when those bands of cloth can be removed from the altars of our archdiocese. I pray for the day when the flowers return.

But one change will not be temporary. In the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, that band of cloth across my chair will remain as a permanent reminder of the pain that the shepherds of this Archdiocese brought upon those placed in our charge. It will remain as long as I am your archbishop, and I would hope future archbishops will retain it as well.

For the sake of those who were harmed by abusive priests, I pray that this campaign will be short. For the sake of future generations, I pray that our memory of it will be long.

The details of the campaign will be announced at a later date, but these liturgical changes will take place beginning on Ash Wednesday, February 13, 2013 — the beginning of Lent. May they bring a deeper meaning to this season of penitence and reflection, and help us take the first steps toward reconciliation.

In sorrow and in hope,
Most Reverend José H. Gomez
Archbishop of Los Angeles

Where the campaign goes after that is left as an exercise for the archbishop. For the sake of the victims of the abuse, and for the faithful whose trust in the church has been shaken, I hope he follows a path like this. Anything less honest, and the fundraiser is doomed to failure.

I wouldn’t pay a penny into this campaign, regardless of its name, structure, or appeal. Why should I, as a layperson, be financially involved in restitution for criminal actions committed by employees of the Catholic Church? Especially when the behavior of officials, including Archbishop Gomez, continues to minimize criminal liability for both priests and the hierarchy.

That’s why any appeal has to end the practice and appearance of minimizing liability, and directly acknowledge what has taken place.

No prevarications.
No pushing blame off on others.
No excuses.
No minimization of the pain of those who were abused.
No minimization of the broken relationship between the hierarchy and the people of the diocese.

To use the sacramental language of the church, reconciliation requires confession of sin and contrition. Until the cardinal and archbishop confess their sins against both the victims of clergy sexual abuse and the people of the diocese, there can be no reconciliation — and without reconciliation, there will be no funds.

I do have to say as much as the letter you wrote is articulate and humble, there is a part of me that thinks the Catholic church needs to look inward and maybe sell some art from it’s overflowing collection or sell some property to raise funds to compensate victims of the crimes committed by the leadership.

There is the need to consider if such an appeal is more enabling then correcting/admonishing a horror.

I am interested to know how the various archdioceses are able to segregate funds legally from one another and the Vatican is able to segregate funds among all of them. This is a hierarchical, centrally-controlled organization – people in Rome have ultimate authority over every decision, including hiring/firing. Why is each archdiocese able to become liable and go broke separately? It seems to me if debts clean out the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, Chicago and Boston should be liable. Obviously, I am not as full of the spirit of Christian forgiveness as Peterr is.

I agree with your response @ 12 yet, I still have deep concern that there will still be a serious element of enabling.

The repeated sins of the crimes of abuse as well as the crimes of leadership trying to hide the crimes repeatedly, and over so much time on a global scale, eventually one has to reach a concern of, “Are we teaching and extending cheap grace?”

Sometimes death of a ministry is the new life in Christ. In this case, it appears a fish rots from the head down.

Take a look at the piece published in the WaPO. It appears the leadership is still viewing themselves/the church, as victims. I seriously do not think there is room for contrite hearts in the leadership after reading the WaPo piece. The crimes of the church have gone beyond practice and appearance of minimizing liability.

So the question that needs to be addressed is not about “how” to write a “funds” letter but what are Christians going to do to address this historic cheap grace which is an offense to God and help the victims?

Yes, reconciliation is definitely required. I’d very much like to see priests and bishops publicly acknowledge their crimes and concealment, seek forgiveness from their parishioners, and offer to resign. I don’t expect it any time soon. For that reason (one among many, including the fact that the local priest keeps telling me how to vote, and that communion is only for those who regularly attend Mass), I no longer call myself an active Catholic.

“This so-called new religion is nothing but a pack of weird rituals and chants, designed to take away the money of fools. Now let’s say the Lord’s Prayer 40 times, but first, let’s pass the collection plate.” – Reverend Lovejoy

our former mayor Richard Riordan and the entire City Gov’t – from the D.A. to the LAPD – need to step up and atone for their sins in enabling Priests to commit their sexual crimes unabated for decades.

the morally repugnant “deference” afforded the Church’s every obstructive move allowed so many more lives to be destroyed.

hey, Mayor Riordan! maybe you can reassign the money you’ve raised with your Catholic Education Foundation? not the legacy that you were aiming for, but one that you richly deserve.

That was handled well (sarcasm implied). Again, even the media tiptoes…”nuns eviction poses perception problem…”

It seems actions and words are about “brands” and “perceptions” not about character or morality.

Again, there is a bigger theological question looming here.

We cannot have a modern day Tetzel-like-Bishop noting the benefits of good works could be obtained by donating money to the church. (Insert victims after good works.)

I cannot help but think of Martin Luther’s Thesis 86: “Why does the pope, whose wealth today is greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build the basilica of St. Peter with the money of poor believers rather than with his own money?

The challenge we face — now and always, as individuals and as a Church — is to resist the temptation to only follow Jesus “half way.” We should never settle for mediocrity or minimum standards in our life of faith.

The 12,000 pages of files that were just released show a picture of settling and minimum standards that shocks the conscience.

This column is filled with fine words, but they need to be followed up with confession of the willingness of the archdiocesan officials to settle for the minimum standard of keeping abusive priests out of jail instead of taking the hard path of owning up to the failures and pain those priests caused and working to make amends. Unless and until that happens, there will be no finding of holiness.

Again from Gomez:

The lives we lead will always be the most credible witness we can give to the Gospel we believe in. People should be able to see “the Catholic difference” — the difference that our Catholic faith makes in our lives.

The comments here, the reactions in the LA Times, and the overall horror that the world outside the Catholic church — and within it from the lay people — make clear that people are revolted at what they’ve seen. The 12,000 pages of files present a very pointed witness of the priorities of the leadership of the archdiocese as it was carried out over the years. Unless and until Gomez himself acts — not talks, but acts — in ways that begin to show a different kind of witness, his words in this column will only reinforce the opinion of more and more people that bishops are not to be believed.

Reading Gomez’s column alongside the letter above in the post leads me to suspect the people of Los Angeles will not see anything like what I penned — at least not any time soon.

The Catholic church nearest my house, that I pass nearly every day, has a large white wood cross on their property, out near the road, with a broken heart on it. The sign reads “mourn for aborted children.”

I want to sneak there in the dead of night and paint over the “aborted” and replace it with “molested.”

“As for a Reformation-like intervention, the last one hasn’t stopped trying yet.” ;)

True. (But what would you expect Lutherans to agree on!)

I meant…Another one… from another Catholic… who is excommunicated. A person of leadership…

Silly, you knew what I meant!

As for linking to this post, that is something to do. Still, a big intervention needs to happens. And we both know with interventions, those involved state they, out of love, will cut off all interaction unless the problem is acknowledged and corrective treatment is sought.

Agree with Apachetrout above and as another former catholic in a large family I will never return. Seeing their commercial with Lou Holtz imploring us to come back just cemented my resolve. Those commercials cost money and it is all big business. Catholicism seems so rooted in money I don’t see a faith based religion anymore. Not too many years ago I could count over 50 practicing Catholics in my immediate family and now there are none. WWJD

As I wrote last November, too many of the bishops believe their problem is simply one of messaging, not of behavior or the message itself. “If we just have better commercials, people will return and things will get better” is the communications strategy that they have adopted.

But the message in those 12,000 pages of files documenting abuse and the actions taken to hide that abuse is crystal clear. Anything less than taking responsibility for those actions will only reinforce the message you and your family and many others have received from the Catholic church.

But . . .

If Gomez sent out a letter like the one I wrote in the post, it would explode across the media. He wouldn’t have to spend a dime on advertising to get his face and message in front of the whole nation, and his actions — not just his words — would be the lead story on the news for a week. If he and Mahony followed through on what I laid out, the local media would be astounded, and the stories in LA would continue far longer than a week.

And maybe, just maybe, the actions would begin to reshape the message the Catholic Church is sending to the world for the better.

Your letter was exceptional and would be well received from you but from Cardinal Gomez it would just be seen as more (and better) PR IMO. I would throw it away as I throw away the dunning letters I still receive from my old church asking for money. They don’t want me back unless I bring my checkbook. I understand why you wrote this letter and it is a good example of contrition and a plea for forgiveness but for me it is over and I was born and brainwashed a Catholic.

However, the Vatican is rich beyond imagining and enabled this behavior for a very long time. Any compensation to victims should be paid by the Vatican. Ordinary Catholics should not even be asked as they had no hand in the crimes, enabling the crimes or covering them up.

As I wrote last November, too many of the bishops believe their problem is simply one of messaging, not of behavior or the message itself. “If we just have better commercials, people will return and things will get better” is the communications strategy that they have adopted.

That’s the same communication strategy of the folks who brought us the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

The point being it’s a communication strategy not any kind of real clean up.

Welcome to FDL

Sign in with Facebook or Google+

OR use your MyFDL username

Toolbox

MyFDL is Firedoglake's community site. Anyone can participate by commenting on posts or joining groups to find other people in your area. Content posted to MyFDL is the opinion of the author alone, and should not be attributed to Firedoglake.